Cape Town - Acting Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka has cleared Local Government MEC Anton Bredell of accusations that he undertook an “ambiguous and unlawful process” in the submission of a provincial investigation report to the George Municipality.
The investigation was related to the manner in which the Western Cape Department of the Premier and the Western Cape Department of Local Government allegedly intervened in the affairs of the George Municipality.
The complaint was lodged with the public protector in February 2020 by GOOD Party secretary-general Brett Herron, who at the time was a member of the provincial legislature. Herron is currently an MP.
In his complaint, Herron claimed, among other things, that in his capacity as a DA leader Bredell had improperly interfered in human resource processes in the George Municipality.
The public protector was tasked with investigating whether the allegations against Bredell were true and, if so, whether such conduct constituted improper conduct as envisaged in the Constitution and maladministration in terms of the Public Protector Act.
Gcaleka found that the allegation against Bredell was unsubstantiated.
With regards to the Department of the Premier, the report said: “The public protector could not establish any evidence to indicate that the Western Cape Department of the Premier initiated any investigation in terms of section 139 of the Constitution.”
Gcaleka said her office had issued a notice to Herron in August last year, giving him the opportunity to make representations in connection with the intended closure of the investigation, but that no response had been received by the September 9 deadline.
She said she considered the investigation as finalised but added: “Should any party wish to challenge this decision they are at liberty to explore legal remedies at their disposal.”
On Monday, Herron said that he was disappointed that the Office of the Public Protector narrowed the scope of the complaint and investigation so that the multitude of issues were reduced to an overly simplified question.
“The over-simplification of the investigation has led to a simple finding and a failure to ombud. The finding is not wrong but the finding doesn’t grasp or address the issues because of the simplification,” Herron said.
He said he would consider legal advice on the finding, the description of issues investigated versus the complaint and supporting evidence submitted, and whether the failures, as he sees them, are worth pursuing through a review.